About your Search

20121117
20121117
STATION
CNN 11
CNNW 11
KRCB (PBS) 2
CNBC 1
FBC 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
KQED (PBS) 1
KQEH (PBS) 1
KRON (MyNetworkTV) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
MSNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 57
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 57 (some duplicates have been removed)
the president up at the u.n. talk about the video. i think the talk of the video probably meant more people in the middle east watched the video that didn't even know the video was there. we now hear that general petraeus said they believe that the c.i.a., that this was a terrorist attack, al-qaeda. so who changed the talking points? it's hard for me to believe that attorney general holder never said anything to the chief of staff at the white house, never said anything to john brennan, who was the top advisor for the president with regard to in the issue and john brennan was at the c.i.a. for many, many years. so there is no information that you can really gather. and i think the congress has a right to know, but more importantly, i think the american people have to know. if you don't have a select committee that has broad-based bipartisan, they'll never find out. had you not had a watergate committee, the nixon administration was lying to the american people. they were lying to the american people and if you go back and look at it and had there not been a broad based committee of bipartis
be sued arming the rebels, but the u.n. embargo will have to be lifted first. the aim? tipping the balance against president assad. the signals today could hardly be clearer. this seemed to be itching to announce formal recognition of the new opposition coalition if the president can be brought down. >> they represent about 90% of the forces on the ground. we are in dialogue with other opposition forces of the coalition. i think the british and international community recognizes the presentation the coalition has. >> still, the crisis in serial worsens by the day. these refugees are risking heading home again, partly in fear of what without adequate shelter, out partly trusting opposition rebels to grow stronger. >>> another sign of the changes in the middle east, clashes have broken out in jordan between anti-government protesters and supporters of the cane. -- of the king abdullah. some protesters have called for the downfall of king abdullah. >>> two former croatian generals have been cleared of war crimes committed during the 1990's. they were given a rousing welcome. an appeals court
of north korea. one is the new regime of kim jong-un, was just one years old, needed to improve living conditions of the people. to that end, they wanted -- they may have wanted to have better relations with japan. that's one reason. the second reason for north korea diplomatically, the united states is a most important country. they would like to have relations, encounters with the united states. in order to pave the way to that end, they wanted to have good relations with japan as a precursor. >> what are the prospects for improvement in relations between pyongyang and tokyo? there are so many issues that need to be solved between the two countries. >> yes, there are so many. among them, most did i feel, important ones, there are three. one is abduction issues. number two -- not in the order of the priority, two is missile testing and nuclear problems. the third one, economic cooperation. those are three difficult issues or barriers. it's not so easy to solve those issues at once. perhaps it need time and endurance, efforts, special efforts, on both sides. out of them, perhaps most t
intelligence community signed off on the talking points. u.n. ambassador susan rice used on several tv shows on the sunday morning five days after the attack. at the same time she said the violence started out as a spontaneous reaction to protest over an anti-islamic video. we now know that wasn't true. katherine herrage was on capitol hill for the hearings. she's live in our dc news room. what do we know about the c.i.a. talking points? >> thank you, good evening. a congressional source with knowledge of the classified testimony tells fox news that the c.i.a. talking points were changed, the language about al-qaeda affiliated individuals was replaced with extremist organization. republicans say this was an effort to minimize or down play the role of terrorism in the benghazi attack itself. the c.i.a. talking points were put through what's called an interagency review. once they left headquarters at langly, the review including input and editing from other intelligence agencies, as well as the justice, state department, and their related media offices. most democrats maintain the final versi
on the al qods brigade to show the rockets hamas is using. the u.n. ambassador called the targeting of jerusalem and tell aviv an escalation by hamas. three israelis have been killed since wednesday and there's a lot to get to and we begin with sarah in gaza city. you've seen missile fire explosions earlier. what are you seeing and hearing now? >> just a few minutes ago another targeted air strike. we hear a loud blast and that's been happening throughout the day. this afternoon it was just like hell here, to be perfectly honest, for the residents here. there were blasts after blasts after blasts and when you looked up in the sky you also saw the telltale signs of rockets being sent from here to israel. the entire sky at one point looked like it was criss-crossed with rockets, a very, very dangerous situation here in gaza. we also, anderson, went to the hospital and the hospital, the doctors there and nurses there completely overwhelmed. every 15 minutes people were coming in including men, women and children, anderson. >> is there any indication that hamas will stop firing? >> repo
diane feinstein defendeded u.n. ambassador susan rice. >> he made it clear that there was significant terrorist involvement. that is not my recollection of what he told us september 14th. >> to say that she is unqualified to be secretary of state i think is a mistake. and the way it keeps going, it's almost as if the intent is to assess nate -- >> joining me now is karen finny a political analyst and armstrong williams a conservative columnist and host of the right side with armstrong williams. hello to you both. good to see you. >> hi, alex. >> ladies first with you, karen. you just heard from congressman king. one of his biggest complaints was the white house held back information that this was a terrorist attack claiming this was classified. this is different from the white house's initial defense that they did call it a terrorist attack right away. are they changing their tune? >> well, what i find interesting is the way congressman king and a number of the other republicans have changed their tune from the night before the briefing and oh, what a difference it makes when you actu
is the ambassador to the u.n. she has been mentioned as a possible replacement for hillary clinton as secretary of state. republican senators john mccain, lindsey graham, they have already said no way, they will hold up her confirmation because of benghazi and comments made days afterwards explaining the attacks. at the time, she said it could have been because of this anti-muslim movie, as we said, but now that's sort of been disproved. i guess the question is -- well, first, listen to. this then i want to ask you -- listen to some of the sound that we have from obama and mccain this week. >> if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. >> that statement is really remarkable in that if the president thinks that we are picking on people, he really does not have any idea of how serious th
organizations here in washington, the word al qaeda got changed to "extremists." and when the points got to u.n. ambassador susan rice, she made no mention of al qaeda or extremists when she went on nbc's "meet the press" five days after the attack. rice did tout the anti-terrorist accomplishments of president obama. pet rae ugs denies any political pressure on the cia to scrub al qaeda from its talking points. new york republican peter king said today, "we need to find out who did the scrubbing and why." larry, back to you. >> many thanks, steve handelsman, appreciate it. so why has general petraeus done a 180 on benghazi? this is a very serious issue. first he blames the attack on a video. now he's saying it was a terrorist attack and the briefing notes were changed. something doesn't add up. here now is michael rubin, resident scholar at the american enterprise institute, and alexis levinson, reporter at the daily quarter. michael, i'll go to you first. peter king himself today, i guess i'll quote this, he said that the testimony petraeus gave today, that they knew immediately it was a terro
after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. >> we haven't seen the president like that in a while. >> testy. defiant. kind of his make my day moment. go after her, make my day. i mean, in a way, and you could look at this two ways politically. you could say, okay, did he do that because now he's going to nominate her to be secretary of state when hillary clinton leaves or did he do it to get it on the record so when he nominates something else like john kerry, he is on the record saying you didn't cow me t not elect her. >> an unprecedented var eed shae vote being nonwhite, do republicans really want the first thing they do in 2013 is filibuster the nomination of a black woman secretary of state. >> in that same press conference, he called her an easy target. i'm not sure what he meant, but it might have been what ron was talking about. >> a little postmortem mitt romney s
representatives from the united states and the u.n. are calling on both sides to show restraint, but restraint seems to be in short order right now. ourarah sidner is live in gaza with a bird's eye view of the conflict. are you seeing more air strikes right now? >> reporter: absolutely, and in just the past few minutes we could hear the loud blasts of air strikes all night long into morning, 6:00 or 7:00 in the morning, blast after blast after blast and could look into the sky and see rockets coming from here in gaza city into israel. i want to show you a picture that our photographer dan morgan was able to take last night around 3:30 in the morning. he's pointing his camera towards what was the police headquarters. hamas police headquarters when he saw this picture. it was a big blast and then a big ball of fire. now, i want to show you what's happened since then. the result of that air strike. i'm going to move out of the way here. we are about 11 stories up looking down on the main part of gaza. you are hearing now some of the traffic. there's only been a few cars, but it's a bit loud up he
points used by susan rice, the ambassador to the u.n. who said publicly the attack was spontaneous and it was sparked by an anti-muslim film. i know this is complicated, but stick with us here. the question remains, why didn't rice's talking points include the fact that this was a terrorist act and a planned one and all of that? listen. >> he said they went through a long process involving many agencies, talking to the justice of the state department, and no one knows yet who came up with the final version of the talking points other than to say the original talking points by the cia were different than the ones that were finally put out. >> national security council spokesman tommy veder says rice's talking points were produced by the intelligence committee, and that, quote, the white house and state department offered one edit changing consulate to "diplomatic facility" for accuracy. he was on the intelligence house committee and he was at the hearing with petraeus today. what do you make of all this? you know republicans were saying there were some kind of political shenanigans
attack from susan rice, the u.s. ambassador to the u.n. she kept her talking points and blamed the deadly attack on outrage over an anti-muslim movie although she did say it was early in the days of the investigation and there was the possiblist an al qaeda group being involved in the escalation of violence, but at that point they had not been able to decide one way or the other who was involved and those talking points were first put out by the cia and went through various agencies and even the white house before ambassador rice used them on september 16th. last night on this program congressman king put the blame squarely on the white house for changing the talking points. watch. >> the intelligence community said that al qaeda was involved. that was taken out by someone in the white house. the intelligence agency said -- >> that's not what the dni said. >> i'm telling you what he told us today and i'm telling you what was their reporting on 12th, 13th and 15th, there were intelligence estimates saying al qaeda was directly involved somehow after that was prepared by the intelligence co
might be that general petraeus has said he believed it was a terrorist and the u.n. ambassador said originally it was not that. is that a legitimate area of some investigation by congress? >> in fairness to susan rice. she did not say it was an act of terrorist. she didn't rule it out either. she made clear her understanding of what happened would evolve over time. the significance of general petraeus on the hill is to begin a more fullsome process to answer questions that still don't have complete answers. the second dimension will be the completion of the accountability review board the arb that the state department is working on and will be released next month by secretary of state hillary clinton. i'm confident through these processes we'll understand through the best of our knowledge what exactly happened and put statements in their proper contexts. >> eliot: look the wild conspiracy theories just seem so crazy and off the wall i don't think they merit discussion. one piece going forward is how this would effect the president's decision about whom and when to nominate to be sec
. and it contradicts u.n. ambassador susan rice, who five days after the attack made the rounds on all five sunday talk shows. remember, she was pushing the position that violence was in reaction to a youtube video. what make this is scandal potentially historic in its reach and effect is the role of the president in all of this. now every day, as more evidence comes out, it is becoming more special more clear that barack obama had to know that there was mounting evidence that al qaeda was involve in this attack and that the anti-islamic video had nothing to do with the murder of ambassador stevens and three others, long before obama continued to point blame at the 13-minute youtube video. think about it this way f. obama's cia director knew almost instantaneously that an al qaeda-affiliated group was responsible for the attack and the station chief in libya reported to washington that there were eyewitness reports that the attack was carried out by militants. and if email shows that the officials at the white house and state department were advised two hours after the attack that an islamic militant g
should defend israel and the court of world preponderance, whether it is in the u.n. or other international forums and insist that the real story come out. it is hamas that has been on the offensive. israel has practiced so much patience and reluctance to go into gaza, until these rockets, as you have indicated, have come into jerusalem and the escalation with rockets coming into tel aviv and other population centers there. we have an obligation. the president has an obligation, thus far, the white house has acted in a way that i believe the israelis can see that america stands by us. certainly, in the past, last couple of years, there has been a questions in my mind about whether where the president and the white house stand as far as the u.s./israel relationship. i am glad to see what they have said this week. i hope it holds. >> greta: talking about a -- i don't know if that gets us clocloser to a solution. i don't pretend to know the solution. but i see that egypt -- president morsi has -- has gotten involved. i see this getting more complicated, an already complicated sit
. really anatrocity but they do happen and here's t thing though that is changing in the uned states. in utah last year we found over a billion barrels of oil deposited in utah. this yea a couple of months ago, in nevada we found the largest oil deposit they think ever on record. they think it rivals if not passes saudi arabia. from what i read the statis it beings u.s. on line by 2017 to 2020 to surpass saudi arabiain the production of oil and gas to supply the world. melissa: you're talk about fracking and talking about shale. that is good poi. does this make the case for shale and fracking when you at the same time we're hearing about the bp settlement? wee remind of a story, 4.5 dal billion in fines at the same time we're looking at photos like this, that maybe while it is obviously a vote for offshore drilling, does it encourage more onshore shale and fcking? >> i would think yes because if there were a spill it could absolutely be contained right there. we ca continue the spill on land and it is not, it doesn't spill the way they do fracking. the process is such, really only s
the top ones used by susan rice. in early days after the attack the u.n. ambassador to the united nations pointed to the film as a potential cause. >> the key is that there were unclassified talking points at a very early stage. >> jacqueline: reporters are sat lawmakers are saying that- for transgendered was asking little about his affair with biographer paula broadwell anything that occurred with respect to disperse the situation has nothing to do with the way he handled benghazi at all. patricia reporter was not under oath of testifying a nod to the job he held before it was lost in a scandal. >> michael yaki is joining us. >> perhaps the nation however.. there is this an undercurrent that i do not understand the election is over but yet there is this under current a narrative that some of the manipulative this to not have an impact on the election. >> and 14 days after this, michael on the view we still a president obama using the word mob it was september 11th and it sure looked like a terror attack. not to even acknowledge that seemed strange. >> that could be part of the time and t
off suspects. u.n. ambassador susan rice used the edited version in remarks five days after the attack. some republicans have accused her of downplaying the terror link to avoid hurting the president's re-election bid. but senate intelligence chair dianne feinstein defended rice today. >> we have seen wrong intelligence before. and it all surrounded our going into iraq. and a lot of people were killed based on bad intelligence. so and i don't think that's fair game. i think mission takes-- mistakes get made. >> holman: the benghazi attack killed u.s. ambassador chris stevens and three other americans. in afghanistan, 17 civilians were killed today when their bus set off a roadside bomb. the victims were on their way to a wedding. separately, two nato service members were killed in a roadside bomb attack in the eastern part of the country. there was hopeful talk today about avoiding the "fiscal cliff" after president obama met with congressional leaders at the white house. a series of tax increases and spending cuts will kick in on january 1, unless the two sides can come to agreement.
. that is a stark contrast to the account u.n. ambassador susan rice offered in the days after the incident when she said that what happened in benghazi was a spontaneous attack. some lawmakers said the discrepancy was the result of evolving intelligence, while others noted the cia's initial assessment of terrorism was classified and therefore not included in the talking points rice was given. critics of the administration are demanding more answers while others are defending ambassador rice. >> the original talking points were much more specific about al qaeda involvements, and yet final ones just said indications of extremists. >> i don't think she should be pilloried for this. she did what i would have done or anything else would have done. >> reporter: now those who were in the room said petraeus testified that his resignation had nothing to do with the consulate attacks, saying it was solely due to the fallout from his admitted extramarital affair. he also apologized for his behavior. >>> a key figure in the resignation of cia director david petraeus is tampa socialite jill kelley. kelley's con
, she is over in a different silo, her job is the u.n. has nothing to do with these internal matters. if they give her a script and she trotz out there and somebody says is that the truth she can say yes. this is what i have been told. she has no reason not to believe it. she is doing what she is told to do. she is trotted out and later if it's proven to be untrue she says i'm just telling you what i was told. >> that's a problem though. because in that scenario the buck stops with her, right in the plausible deniability rule. the president comes out and says the buck stops with me. on me. representative peter king was in those hearings and is going to join us next hour's to know who then took out al qaeda out of the talking points? who in the administration took it out. >> how do we find that out? >> where does the buck stop then. >> at some point somebody is going to talk because they are going to be under oath and nobody wants to perjure themselves. somebody had to do the draft. the order may have been given way up beyond the stenographer. somebody had to give the order. someone d
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 57 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)